Sonnex failures provide ‘hard lessons’

Every police force in England and Wales will receive a letter from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) after an investigation into the police response to the prison recall of Dano Sonnex, who murdered two French students.
It found that Sonnex’s ‘recall to prison’ notice was not dealt with as a matter of urgency and that confusion, misinterpretation and poor communication between an inspector, sergeant and constable resulted in a serious delay in the execution of an arrest warrant.
The IPCC report, published last week following the conclusion of the criminal trial into the deaths of Laurent Bonomo and Gabriel Ferez, made recommendations to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and advised on disciplinary action to be taken against a police sergeant following significant individual and organisational errors.
Mr Bonomo and Mr Ferez were murdered by Sonnex and Nigel Farmer on June 29, 2008. They were stabbed a total of 244 times before their property was set on fire.
Sonnex had been on non-parole licence since February 8, 2008. He was subsequently arrested on May 1, charged with handling stolen goods and remanded in custody. Police bailed him on May 16, and he then went missing.
On June 13, 2008, the Ministry of Justice informed Lewisham borough police of a recall to prison notice for Sonnex. Police took 16 days to respond to the notice – not visiting his last known address until June 29, 2008, the same day he murdered Mr Bonomo and Mr Ferez. MPS officers did not arrest Sonnex until July 10, 2008.
The IPCC investigation focused on the proportionality and timeliness of the police response after the recall notification was received and looked into whether any offence had been committed by any police officers or members of police staff and what should be changed to ensure a more effective response in future.
The investigation found that initially there was a delay of seven weeks after Sonnex’s initial arrest, and a further four weeks after his release on bail, before police were informed of the recall to prison on June 13. The recall was not dealt with as a matter of urgency, it was a “standard” rather than an “emergency” recall. The MPS, however, told police in the borough at the time that the target period in which to return him to prison was 96 hours, missed by a significant margin.
There was some complication in intelligence suggesting that Sonnex may have been in possession of firearms. The IPCC stated that if the sergeant involved in the case had communicated better and effectively assessed the risk, this delay could have been avoided, therefore concluding that the sergeant did not perform his duties adequately. This was a breach of the Police Code of Conduct and he has received a disciplinary warning.
Since the IPCC made its recommendations to the MPS, a unit has been established in each London borough dedicated to arresting wanted offenders. Revised systems have also been put in place, with other agencies to improve information-sharing and ensure the clear identification and timely arrest of offenders.
The IPCC investigation also looked into the actions of police prior to June 2008 and the way Sonnex was monitored following his release from prison on February 8, 2008, and the investigation of a serious assault two days later for which Sonnex was a suspect.
The further investigation found that the system of recording multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) details was inadequate which meant that Sonnex would have come to the notice of borough police officers, who were unaware of the need to contact the MAPPA team and the probation service. The MPS has since taken action to rectify this situation in light of this case, which the IPCC has accepted.
IPCC Deputy Chair, Deborah Glass, said: “The failing on the part of the police was a result of confusion, poor communication and weak procedures and hard lessons must be learnt. It was a missed opportunity to stop Sonnex and protect Mr Bonomo and Mr Ferez from the terrible threat that he posed